Have you figured out that this is a made for TV event and thats it?I guess this is their way of fool-proofing a committee that fails to take into account strength of schedule, but just make that a primary part of the criteria instead of blindly looking at W-L records. Apparently a committee isn't smart enough to do that.
But the reality is this isn't a bad setup for the Big 12 and ACC because if they just selected the 16 best teams there would be years where one or both of these conferences would only get 1 team in.
It’s going to be fun when there is controversy over which Big 12 team gets in between the CG loser with a 10-3 record and the 10-2 team that didn’t play in the CG.I guess this is their way of fool-proofing a committee that fails to take into account strength of schedule, but just make that a primary part of the criteria instead of blindly looking at W-L records. Apparently a committee isn't smart enough to do that.
But the reality is this isn't a bad setup for the Big 12 and ACC because if they just selected the 16 best teams there would be years where one or both of these conferences would only get 1 team in.
I wrote about this! PPP
Will get receipts
This is why I am a proponent of a full Public-Private Partnership to make the Football program a high performing entity somewhat outside of the AD because they are too slow, too uncreative, and too stuck in the past.
Colorado Football teeters between a Billion Dollar operation and a G5 poor program.
Did anyone tell you it wasn't a feasible thing to do?Wrote this post in January:
You all made fun of this idea that I had and now once an SEC Athletic Department does it for real, does that still make it stupid.
We should do the same thing in order to fully unlock the Prime Effect
![]()
How Kentucky’s New LLC Will Change the Business of College Sports - Boardroom
The decision by Kentucky to operate its athletic department as an LLC could provide a model that other schools use in this new era.boardroom.tv
NikDid anyone tell you it wasn't a feasible thing to do?
Just because someone did it doesn't mean it was a good idea. Not sure why Kentucky making this decision equals you thinking it justifies you taking a victory lap. Besides, most of the criticism people have has been about how it fundamentally changes college football in a way we fans don't like. Even if it's a good financial and/or competitive move doesn't mean it is something people should support.
I thought I was in the Pillow Talk thread for a minute.Have you figured out that this is a made for TV event and thats it?
This bull**** lets TV force a rematch between Alabama and Georgia, Michigan and tOSU. Possibly even a really stupid third meeting. Whatever TV comes up with it will be big name matches/rematches.I thought I was in the Pillow Talk thread for a minute.
Did anyone tell you it wasn't a feasible thing to do?
Just because someone did it doesn't mean it was a good idea. Not sure why Kentucky making this decision equals you thinking it justifies you taking a victory lap. Besides, most of the criticism people have has been about how it fundamentally changes college football in a way we fans don't like. Even if it's a good financial and/or competitive move doesn't mean it is something people should support.
SOS doesn’t matter if you lose games…I guess this is their way of fool-proofing a committee that fails to take into account strength of schedule, but just make that a primary part of the criteria instead of blindly looking at W-L records. Apparently a committee isn't smart enough to do that.
But the reality is this isn't a bad setup for the Big 12 and ACC because if they just selected the 16 best teams there would be years where one or both of these conferences would only get 1 team in.
BYU don’t care. The church will include the settlement in his new NIL deal
NmBYU don’t care. The church will include the settlement in his new NIL deal
I would be inclined to agree but then I remember when they kicked Brandon Davies off the team when they were like a top 5 team heading into MarchBYU don’t care. The church will include the settlement in his new NIL deal
It's a conundrum. Let's play out a hypothetical where CU goes 11-1 and wins the Big 12 regular season title. The team is sitting there at #9 in the latest committee rankings. If the opponent in the B12C game was 9-3 and ranked #21 and there's a 10-2 B12 team ranked at #13 which finished 3rd, should our Buffs decline to play in the game?So the 12 team CFP goes to straight seeding 1-12 with top 4 getting the byes instead of the 4 highest conference champs. The top 5 conference champs still make the playoff but Boise will no longer get a Bye (neither will the Big 12 champ most likely).
On one hand, this is how it should work from a seeding standpoint. OTOH, the Conference Championship Games have been devalued even further and it's very unlikely the Big 12 will ever get a Bye.
However, this is almost assuredly only a one year change as it will likely go to 16 teams with no byes for the 26-27 season.
Unless you’re Bama, amirite?SOS doesn’t matter if you lose games…
But but but…he’s JewishBYU don’t care. The church will include the settlement in his new NIL deal
If the Big 12 were smart they’d just say “F the CCG” since the winner isn’t getting an autobid anyway. Set their best team up for success and seeding.It's a conundrum. Let's play out a hypothetical where CU goes 11-1 and wins the Big 12 regular season title. The team is sitting there at #9 in the latest committee rankings. If the opponent in the B12C game was 9-3 and ranked #21 and there's a 10-2 B12 team ranked at #13 which finished 3rd, should our Buffs decline to play in the game?
I think the committee stated last year that they wouldn’t punish CCG losers if this type of scenario played outIt's a conundrum. Let's play out a hypothetical where CU goes 11-1 and wins the Big 12 regular season title. The team is sitting there at #9 in the latest committee rankings. If the opponent in the B12C game was 9-3 and ranked #21 and there's a 10-2 B12 team ranked at #13 which finished 3rd, should our Buffs decline to play in the game?
Big 12 champ still gets an auto bid (assuming two G5 champs arent ranked higher) but there’s just no bye for the conference champsIf the Big 12 were smart they’d just say “F the CCG” since the winner isn’t getting an autobid anyway. Set their best team up for success and seeding.
But, then what happens to the #21 and #13 teams?I think the committee stated last year that they wouldn’t punish CCG losers if this type of scenario played out
Big 12 champ still gets an auto bid (assuming two G5 champs arent ranked higher) but there’s just no bye for the conference champs
I think that there's a strong chance the committee went to Sankey this past season and said, "We wish Clemson wouldn't have made a mess of this by bearing SMU, and that Bama would have handled their **** against Oklahoma, but it will just look too bad if we put them in over SMU. So, what do want to change for next year?"The SEC/B1G wants, the SEC/B1G gets. Moving to straight seeding is just yet another move aimed at making life easier for the two conferences that already have just about any advantage imaginable.
So the 12 team CFP goes to straight seeding 1-12 with top 4 getting the byes instead of the 4 highest conference champs. The top 5 conference champs still make the playoff but Boise will no longer get a Bye (neither will the Big 12 champ most likely).
On one hand, this is how it should work from a seeding standpoint. OTOH, the Conference Championship Games have been devalued even further and it's very unlikely the Big 12 will ever get a Bye.
However, this is almost assuredly only a one year change as it will likely go to 16 teams with no byes for the 26-27 season.
What’s bad about 16 team proposals? The autobids?This is a logical move but as you pointed out the negative is that it de-emphasizes the CCG's for the case where both participants are ranked high enough that both the winner and loser will be in the CFP regardless. However in that case they're likely playing for a first round bye. This change still doesn't fix the issue of how they select the teams for the CFP.
As for some of the 16-team proposals I've seen, those are just so bad.
Yes, guaranteed 8 teams, or half the field, from the Big1G and the SEC. Regardless of what the season brings. The ACC and Big 12 get 4 total. Not arguing for more for the Big12 and ACC but there is zero reason to guarantee 8 spots to those 2 conferences. Let them earn it and not just based on past performance. Just garbageWhat’s bad about 16 team proposals? The autobids?
It’d be interesting to see how it would have shaken out the past 5 years or so in terms of how many B1G and SEC team ended up in the top 16. Something tells me they’d be getting 8 between the two of them anyways, but they wanted to guarantee that they were going to be on equal footing with each other and not have one get 5 and the other get 3 or something.Yes, guaranteed 8 teams, or half the field, from the Big1G and the SEC. Regardless of what the season brings. The ACC and Big 12 get 4 total. Not arguing for more for the Big12 and ACC but there is zero reason to guarantee 8 spots to those 2 conferences. Let them earn it and not just based on past performance. Just garbage
Probably so but why be afraid of earning it? That is my only gripe with the 16 teams. If you are that good, the conferences should not need the guarantee. It only serves to reinforce that they believe they might not be as strong on the field in the future.It’d be interesting to see how it would have shaken out the past 5 years or so in terms of how many B1G and SEC team ended up in the top 16. Something tells me they’d be getting 8 between the two of them anyways, but they wanted to guarantee that they were going to be on equal footing with each other and not have one get 5 and the other get 3 or something.